Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I'm having a bit of a difference of opinion with my GM; I'm bringing a character into a very low-end game (40 points, -20 in disads) and when I asked him if Quirks were allowed, he said yes. But then he said they counted against the disadvantage limit. When I questioned this, he said that in the RAW, they were disadvantages and thus subject to the cap.

Anyone? Please?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

They are disadvantages, like anything else with a negative point cost. It's up to the GM if he wants to count them against the disad cap for a particular campaign. If you think he's only doing that because he wants to go "by the book", it's not customary to count Quirks or negative point [race features] against the disad cap.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Whose custom? The Basic Set says they should count, and GCA counts them (quirks not racial disadvantages).

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Where in the Basic Set does it specifically state that quirks count against any disadvantage cap?

And GCA is a character building program; GCS (which I use) counts Quirks separately.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Page 11, "A disadvantage is anything with a negative cost, including ... and all the specific disabilities listed in Chapter 3." Page 120, " This limit applies to the total points you can get from all traits with a negative point costs ... or the list below."
GCA is the "official" program, and I gather the way it accounts for disadvantage limits was one of the initial requirements that Armin was instructed to implement.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I've never counted them against the Disadvantage Cap, mostly because I feel that they are trivial RP elements that the Player is taking on, and as such, I don't mind rewarding them with those extra points. They add flavor in a nearly non-mechanical way.

This is probably because that was from 3rd edition, I'd have to bust out the dusty tomes from then, but I don't think they counted then.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Page 11, right under Disadvantage limit.

Disadvantage Limit
A disadvantage is anything with a
negative cost, including low attributes,
reduced social status, and all the spe-
cific disabilities listed in Chapter 3.

Note that quirks are in chapter 3, which is labeled disadvantages, and have a negative cost.



GCA has the weight of being the official SJG endorsed character building program. GCS does not, so using it as an argument one way or another on the rules is about as "authoritative" as using the forums here.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Except that it's also stated that quirks are not necessarily disadvantages.

See, I didn't know that.

I'm used to 3rd edition, where Quirks had their own chapter ...

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

That was the way it was in 3E, yes.

How so? According to page 11, a disadvantage is a trait with a negative cost, quirks have a negative cost, therefore they are disadvantages.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Page 162, under 'Quirks'.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I think that's intended to mean that a Quirk isn't necessarily disadvantageous to the character hence the example of Greed vs. "Prefers to be paid in gold." It is not intended address disadvantage limits, or contradict pages 11 and 120. Having a Will 12 isn't a disadvantage either in that sense but it still counts against your limit if your IQ is 15.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Yeah, I have issues with that too.

4E allows you to tune your character's attributes exactly the way you want them, such as having an ivory-tower genius with raw intellect reaching into the stratosphere, but being no more perceptive or strong-willed than your average man on the street (or less so, for classic absent-minded professors) ... but then they make it hard for you to do so, if there is a disadvantage cap.

In my games, I define "IQ as IQ" (I call it "smarts") to be separate from "total IQ" in much the same way as HP, Lifting ST and Striking ST are all part of ST, but can be increased separately. So the only way it actually becomes a disadvantage is if any of those stats go below average values.

But I digress.

So is it the official GURPS line that Quirks are indeed subject to any disadvantage cap, or no?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Yes. As has been said, the sole test for "Does this count vs. limits on disads?" is "Does it have a negative point cost?" Nothing else matters a whit.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

By the current rules, he is correct. People have a tendency to be confused by the fact that in the 3rd edition, the disad limit and the quirk limit were two different things.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

What about p. B11? "Disadvantages
that are part of your racial makeup
(your “racial template”; see p. 260) are
also exempt."

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I think that racial packages (and other meta-traits) are assumed to be single trait.
Whatever is inside does not count for various limitation, as it is invisible in a container.

celjabba

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

But then "is it in a container?" becomes a second test.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

You're supposed to view racial packages as black boxes; decomposing them isn't necessary or relevant for character creation, only for race creation, which isn't the player's job. What matters is the total cost, not the cost of the bits. This is as true of racial packages as it is of, say, the points "saved" for limitations on advantages. Sure, Onset, 1 minute, -10% saves you 1 point on Crushing Attack 2d, but Crushing Attack 2d (Onset, 1 minute, -10%) [9] is a 9-point trait, not a 10-point trait and a -1-point trait.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Doesn't this leave a problem of duplicating encapsulated disads or traits with personal ones?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I wouldn't think duplication would be a problem, the Racial traits would stack if applicable and be disallowed if not, of course a GM might allow Racial disadvantages to be bought off too.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Another confusing aspect is that quirks are listed as in addition to the disadvantage limit for most character templates with defined disadvantage limits (Action, Dungeon Fantasy). Makes it seem like the game authors intended quirks to be counted separately from the disadvantage limit, especially since Kromm himself wrote both of those supplements.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

One point I want to bring up is that while there was a shift between 3e and 4e regarding if Quirks are disadvantages (3e No, 4e Yes), there was also a major shift in Disad Limits.

In 3e, PCs were generally limited to -40pts in Disads and -5 Quirks. 4e's standard limiter is one half of the PCs point total. A 100cp 3e character (with a negative point value limited to -40/-5) translates to a 150cp 4e character...which has a negative point value limit of -75cp...which is more than enough of a boost to take care of buying down Perception, Quirks, etc.

The issue here is mostly that the game the GM is running is ridiculously low point.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

While the "baseline" starting point value for 4E is 150 vs. 3E's 100, I think that's a shift in focus to more competent baseline starting characters, not a statement than a 100cp 3E character is equivalent to a 150CP 4E character

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

It's a bit of both, I suspect. Most 3e characters, if translated "as is" are going to see some point inflation -- the standard (for my old groups) IQ 12 DX 12 just got 40 points more expensive, to start with!

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Yeah. I certainly thought they didn't count against the limit, because every time I see character creation guidelines they're phrased something like 200/-50/-5.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

"Necessarily" is defined by the GM. What did your GM say/rule about Quirks in his campaign.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Reduced Attributes and Secondary Characteristics are listed in their respected sections as well, this is organizational, and doesn't relate to disadvantage limits at all. If you mean that some published Templates violate suggested disadvantage limits by including Quirks, then that is probably errata and should be submitted.

Can you point to an example of that format in a published 4e source? Basic 162 limits Quirks by number to 5, this is unrelated to their effect on the disadvantage limit. Similarly PU2, MA (and all books with MA format styles) similarly limits Perks by number. I suggest that that format really ought to be 200/8/=50/-5 for consistency.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

That is not at all what I was talking about.

What I was referring to was that they suggest disadvantage limits of 50 *plus* five points in quirks.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

The box on Dungeon Fantasy 15 does seem to contradict with the Basic Set. Perhaps it's errata?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

The way i read DF p15,

Suggested limit=(50+5)

wich confirm that quirks do count against the limit.
Simply, that box and other xxx/yyy/5 remind that among your disads, you can take up to 5 quirks, but that if you don't take them, those 5 points are unavailable for other disads.

If i understand correctly

Celjabba

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Or perhaps Dungeon Fantasy simply has its own rules regarding disad limits, departing from the suggestions made in the Basic Set, as both GM's and Campaign books are allowed to do. After all, DF characters are limited to -50 points in disads, instead of the -125 points they would be allowed under the suggestions the Basic Set. That the -5 points in quirks are allowed in addition to the -50 points in disads is just another point of departure from the normal suggestions laid out in the Basic Set.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

No, the real issue is the same that existed in 3e -- some GMs taking a *suggested* disadvantage limit and turning it into a *fixed, absolute* disadvantage limit.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

It's unclear to me whether that 50 points is intended to include quirks or not.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

The way i read it, the limit is 55 point, with 5 points that can only be quirks.

I doin't know the exact rule of sentence-parsing in english, but it seem to me this mean that the limit is 50+5, with different things allowed for the 50 and the 5.
I don't see why you would read it as limit=50 and +5 outside.

English is not my native language, so i may be wrong, however.

celjabba

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

No, you're reading it correctly. It's also clear that DF intends you to have 50 points in disads and five in quirks by the way the templates are written - they use up fifty points in disadvantages, but go on to say that you should use points spent on quirks in order to get specific types of gear, for example.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Agreed. The suggestions in the Basic Set are just that, suggestions. Some campaign books or world books may set up alternate rules which differ from the suggestions in the Basic Set, but that in no way changes the suggested disadvantage limits from the Basic Set, or the fact that GMs are free to change the limit to suit themselves anyway.

Exactly. Dungeon Fantasy and Action are intended as over the top campaign books; as such they offer several sets of variant rules within them. Nobody blinks when DF limits what spells a Wizard is allowed to have, lopping off several whole colleges, yet change the rules regarding the disadvantage limit for the campaign and people freak and start wondering if the Basic Set needs errata.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

There's also the fact that every single campaign I've ever seen except one used the 'disadvantage limit + 5 points in quirks' model, and the one that didn't was quickly changed so it did after someone questioned why it wasn't. Presumably, this is either due to people using Action/DF to figure things out or due to being used to a 3rd edition rule, or it just became customary and people forgot why.

Also, DF/Action generally mention when something is different from the Basic Set and the specific exemption of quirks from the general disadvantage limit is something that should have been more clearly different from the general rules/guidelines.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Not just the ridiculously low point, but when a GM is imposing Quirks as part of an optional silly disad limit it hints at an antagonistic relationship of GM vs. players.

Quirks are good roleplaying props, when a GM argues against that the GM is arguing against roleplaying.



I won't get into what I think of people playing ridiculously low point games with disad limits, that wouldn't be constructive...
Though I will reference the Ordinary People: Characters [0] to [-50] thread, which shows low point believable characters, without the anti-roleplaying broken disad limit of course.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Wow ok why is there still an argument about this?

Krohm said "Quirks = Disadvantages and thus count towards your disadvantage total". That, to me, would be an official ruling on the question and thus make it RAW.

Because this is GURPS you, a GM, are free to edit and/or change RAW but essentially the argument has an "official" ruling and thus is now moot.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

So how much does Race:foo (-20, made up of a -30 and a +10) count towards the disad limit, 20 or 0 (30, I presume, is right out)?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Foo (Racial package) [-20] is a -20-point disadvantage.

Bar (Meta-Trait) [-20] is a -20-point disadvantage.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

That is a very poor characterization of what he said, and the use of quotes flirts with the mods' interpretation of personal attack.

Kromm said that quirks are disadvantages, and went on to discuss what else is considered a disadvantage. He did not comment on the disad limit, probably [because] there is no official, specific disad cap to comment on. The 50% rule of thumb is used because it provides a widely portable standard, but is soft-pedaled to let GMs feel empowered to use a different cap or none at all as it suits their game.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

That to me is a bad quote by you vainly trying to twist a writer's comment into justifying a "disad total" as RAW, instead of the dumb optional rule it actually is.

Disad limits are not RAW, they are an optional rule intended for bad gaming groups with GM vs. Player issues.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Actually, you can spin that the other way just as easily - he's generously permitting you to run your disadvantages up to the limit without taking something actually very disadvantageous for the last 5 points of it. For that matter, it's just as reasonable to say complaining about the disadvantage cap hints at an antagonistic player who is going to be a troublemaker for the whole game. Either of those *could* be true, but deserves the benefit of the doubt at least.

Point values, disadvantage caps, what counts as a disadvantage, UB costs, and what disadvantages (and advantages) I won't allow at all no matter what the point values are, are no more adversaral than deciding on a genre, setting the rules is what the GM is *for*.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Now I think you go too far. I have always used disad limits. But the groups I've GM'd are not now, nor have they every been, "bad gaming groups with GM vs. Player issues."

Restrictions can be aids to creativity in much the same way that Shakespeare created magic while still adhering to the sonnet form.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

This is worth reiterating. The key point of 4e even more than other editions, is FUN. The disad limit is ONLY there to give guidelines on what will be a fun, playable character. GMs and players who feel that 'real' roleplaying doesn't require points can just play that way. GMs and players who can handle the constraints of very large, severe disad totals can do that too. Most can only keep a few major things like that in check at once, thus the recommendation.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I'll stick to the line that Disad limits are an indication of a bad GM player dynamic.
The GM is either antagonistic, or he's gotten burned by Munchkin players in the past and he's ham handing his way instead of growing some b...sense and actually looking at the characters submitted.

I've been running GURPS for over 20 years now and I've never had a player submit more disads than they wanted to roleplay, in fact, outside of genres like Supers and such, I have a hard time getting players to take more than 30 points worth of disads.

As for the sheer unrealistic silliness of disad limits at low points, I again refer to the Ordinary People thread.

When someone says they reconcile in their mind a lower point value character with less disads that is a leading indicator that such a person doesn't understand what a point value system means.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

yes IQ 15 Will 12 count against the disad limit because it has a Negative point cost. Some people see this is sill but they also often the same people com plain that IQ! is broken.

(This is totally separate from the group that don't care about point balance at all and only feel the need to ok the concept and wither the abilit matches the concept)

Also While Racial packages are black boxes, if your Racial Package has an advantage X that you don't want the have then Does not have X [-N] counts for N against your Disad limit.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Let's not forget that the entire point of disadvantages is to bribe the munchkins, and the disadvantage limit never restricts the maximum number of problems you can *play*, only the maximum number you get points back for them. Strangely you rarely see character designs that take anything that exceeds the cap and accept getting no points for the excess.

I'll even concede that the ideal may well be to say "There's no limit on disadvantages, take as many as you want, all of them are worth 0 points." but I bet if you do you'll see even fewer characters pushing toward that notional -30.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

This is rude. I always use disad limits, yet:

1) I have a great GM-player dynamic.
2) I am not antagonistic towards my players
3) Have never had a Munchkin player give me problems with disads
4) I always look at and approve submitted characters.

So, either you are calling me a liar--which is rude...or you are making sweeping generalizations wherein you treat your biases as objective reality. Also rude.

Why can't you just say something like, "The question of whether Quirks count as disads doesn't apply to my games because I don't use disad limits. I don't use disad limits because *insert positive, non-judgemntal statement about your preferred method.* Why do you have to turn this into, "People who use disad limits are bad GMs."

I don't say you are a bad GM because you don't use limits.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Good for you, because you've had sensible players. Sensible is a different axis of measurement from "munchkin" by the way.

I've got players that are too creative for their own good. I don't doubt their ability to track 180 points in disadvantages and make sure to punish themselves with them on a session-by-session basis (or even more frequently) - and one of them I'm not sure he could spend that bonus 180 points in a munchkinny way to save his life.

He would be inadvertently scene stealing, however, by needing to be carried around by the other PCs. Or he would get abandoned and basically dropped from the game by the other PCs, or he'd be more handicapped by them than the campaign premise was really set up to accommodate. Either way, someone - either the player with 180 points in disads, the other players, or the GM is going to have a headache. Which isn't fun, and that is kind of the point of gaming.

Some genres just don't have room for characters with tons of disadvantages on a recurring basis, and I mean this even when the character doesn't get ANY points back for them. Net point value is a side issue that distracts in these conversations.

Most kinds of military, all special ops short of special ops comedy, super spy agent, many modes of "Genre fantasy" (but certainly not all!)... all of these tend to get deformed or outright self-destruct by the addition of a character with a high disadvantage burden - mostly because characters with big disads, strongly penalized attributes, or a huge pile of little disads are damned unlikely to have got themselves into the situation in the first place, and may be unable to pull their own weight to get themselves out of it.

I put a disad limit on my games like I put any other character creation guideline (including total point value!) - it's a soft limit, intended as a framework for the players so they don't spin out of control or get side-tracked from the concept everyone agreed to. Disadvantage limits don't replace the GM reviewing their character sheets any more than saying "No spells" replaces reviewing the character sheets, it's instead meant to filter out the really bad ideas that were generated mostly because the player didn't focus. Putting limits in character creation means you TRUST your players to actually follow them. Adversarial GM/Player relationships quickly lead to players ignoring or ruleslawyering their way around limits - co-operative relationships thrive on staying within the agreed upon limits as an artistic challenge.

Disad limits (along with all the OTHER guidelines I set when putting together a campaign) are a bit like spam filters for my players really bad ideas. If they come up with something that they feel needs to be Cursed and Blind, and they actually want to play rather than sort of threw together on a whim, I feel pretty confident that any of my players would approach me and say "I know you said maximum -50 points, but I think this is really cool, and I think I can make this work without ******* everyone else off." I'm not going to burn his character sheet just because I set a 50 point limit. Same thing, if I'm starting a 150 point game, and someone wants to play a 50 point (or a 250 point) character enough to actually ask me about the possibility, I'm not going to reject him out of hand. But saying "We'll be playing an 150 point game" means that I don't get the player sort of randomly submitting a 50 point or 250 point character because he sort of built one by accident.

I understand that your players don't do that. But I have to point out, I'm not GMing for your players.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Ze's comment does not mention any specific person; why do you insist on taking it as a personal attack against yourself?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I see your point, but in my experience a purely numerical limit does not really
help much to solve this problem, because a character with disadvantages be-
low the limit can be unsuitable for a specific genre or setting while a charac-
ter with disadvantages above the limit can still fit into the genre or setting.

Therefore I prefer to give the players a kind of "to do list" describing the phy-
sical, mental and social abilities a character needs to take part in the specific
campaign. Beyond that, the players can choose whatever disadvantages they
like, provided the result still fits into that basic framework.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Because he and I were in conversation with each other. And the conversation went like this:


He says, "GM's who do this are bad"
I say, "I do this, I'm not bad."
He says, "I maintain, GMs who do this are bad."

The first statement could easily be taken as not a personal attack--and I didn't take the first statement as a personal attack. But after I placed my person into the discourse by speaking from my personal experience (rather than in broad generalities)--after I said--"I am such a GM," he reiterated the statement, which then now becomes also personally directed towards me.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Your identification with [the] group does not make a sweeping generalization into a personal attack. But I'm going to ask the mods to decide, since this is not the first time this has come up.


Mods: the "That to me is a bad quote by you" part of Ze's comment was addressing a different person, it's not actually part of his convo with Trooper6.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I certainly don't think it is egregious enough to warrant punishment--note, I didn't PM mods to complain. I just wanted to alert Ze that his method of argument--sweeping generalizations and judgement aimed at denigrating other people's play style could be phrased in a some other way that was less aggressive.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Not objective reality, I'm stating that the #2 item on your list is inconsistent with disad limits.

Now you may choose to not to believe that, but that just goes to the unknown unknows thread, it's not rude for me to point out truth.

I haven't heard any explanation from you why you'd hold hard to an optional disad limit rule at the cost of character creation and player involvement, you simply stated "Restrictions can be aids to creativity in much the same way that Shakespeare created magic while still adhering to the sonnet form." which statement reads as antagonistic and indicative of a power play control dynamic as all get out.

I hadn't realized you were posting as zack_black, sock puppets are bad form you know. ;p

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

It isn't truth, it is your opinion. Just because you believe it doesn't make it so--and certainly not for people who aren't you.

I hold to the disad limit rule because it has never had a negative impact on character creation or player involvement in any of the games I have GM'd in all of the 22 years I've been GM'ing GURPS so why wouldn't I go with what is recommended in the book. My players appreciate knowing what the character creation guidelines are. That gives them building blocks to work with. Then they create awesome things. GM's oversee and determine certain things in a game. That is their job. Having responsibility to oversee certain things does not equal antagonism. When I was the facilitator for a support group, it was my responsibility to manage that discussion...that in no way meant I has an antagonistic relationship or some kind of power trip over the people in the support group.

If having starting point limits, or disad limits, or limits as to if a game were cinematic or realistic, or any of the other many things GMs decide ever caused problems, I'd think about doing something different. But it never has. I've continued to have rich and interesting PCs with players who are involved and happy...and I am happy to facilitate their fun and explore interesting stories.

Sometimes I've had problem players, but never has the problem had anything to do with starting point limits or disad limits. So why wouldn't I keep using the rules that are recommended? They have never caused problems, all players are treated equally, and players have a set of parameters to aid them in their creative process. Win-win all around. In my experience.

Now if you don't want Disad limits, and that works in your campaigns, good for you. I'm not going to judge your campaigns.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I think many of us would disagree. The 40 point characters with a 20 point limit is not anything I personally would ever do, though.

I *do* run games with low point totals, though -- as low as 75. My disadvantage guideline is 50 points or half the points allowed for the character, whichever is greater. So, characters in my 75 point game have a suggested limit of 50, and characters in a 150 point game have a suggested limit of 75. I don't think I've ever seen anyone go that high, however.

I do agree with you on some level though. A GM who says "design whatever you want for x points" and doesn't review character sheets is probably not an effective GURPS GM, unless he or she provides a lot of additional guidance or is using a more standardized product like Dungeon Fantasy.

Even so, in situations where the players are designing characters on their own, GMs should still review the sheets, make suggestions, et cetera.

My two cents.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

But that has nothing to do with Disad limits.

A GM can have disad limits and review characters.
A GM can have disad limits and not review characters.
A GM can have no disad limits and review characters.
A GM can have no disad limits and not review characters.

To say one of the problems with GMs who enforce disad limits is that they should be reviewing characters is a straw man.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

When personal offense is taken at a criticism of a *choice*that people are free to make or not, to recognize that offense as valid is to make claims of victimhood a tool for silencing dissent.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Making statements that those who GM in a style that you don't like are bad GMs is a way of silencing dissent. Calling people out on that isn't.

There is a difference between an attack and a critique.

"Anyone who does X is an antagonistic GM" is not a critique.

ETA: Also note, I'm not saying, "Ze stop talking," I'm just asking him to communicate his ideas in a less attacky sort of way. It is possible to talk about the positives of having no disad limits with out name calling people who do something different.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

No it's not. If I say "People who like ice cream are pedophiles/nazis/racists/martians/lightbulbs" and you respond "I like ice cream but am not a pedophile/etc, and am offended that you would think I am one because of my desire for frozen milk and sugar," that is not a claim to victimhood. That's a fairly rational response to a ludicrously antagonistic statement.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Well for one, because it isn't recommended in the book, it's listed as an optional crutch for GMs who have power dynamic issues.

They create awesome things with 40 base points plus 20 points in disads?
That'd be awesome only in the level of lameness involved.

They aren't recommended, they're listed as an optional rule of thumb for people who need that particular crutch in their GM vs Player dynamic.

I'm saying outright that if you're running 40 point campaigns with a hard 20 point disad limit that we should judge your campaign as being antagonistic and resulting in lame character generation all around.

You can hardly make much of a believable or 3-dimensional character that way, nor anything much of interest to play, it's just lame and a clear indication of a GM who is having power issues, either because he can't handle player options or because he needs to keep PCs under his thumb so they don't jump any rails.

20 points in disads means say IQ 12, Per 10, Will 10, congratulations, you've now created a setup where 40 point characters cannot have any Quirks or Disads for roleplaying purposes, lame.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Oh please, that's such oversensitivity that it ain't even funny.

If you want to take offense at some critique you're free to do so, but no one should deign that oversensitivity as being valid.

I like making generalized statements, a generalized statement is not an absolute, it's a generalization, things which are generalizations are indications of what lies beyond in general, not necessarily in specific, taking it in specific is oversensitivity or denial.

Strawman on your part there, but to answer because I'm an idiot that way, if A says "people who molest X are Y" and B responds that he "molests X but isn't Y and is offended at being considered Y", then that is both a claim to victimhood by B and an indication that B is in denial about what Y even means.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Sure, but that requires that the definition of "Y" is "someone who molests X." Claiming that people who use a portion of the rules as written of GURPS are automatically bad GMs is so ludicrous a statement as to be farcical. The problem is you're the one claiming that "someone who molests X" is not the definition of "Y."

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Ze mentioned GM review; that's what I was responding to. I don't think I connected the two.

Was it necessary to itemize this? I assure you I'm quite familiar with the rules of logic...

I wasn't saying that. I was responding to a different part of Ze'Manel's post ("The GM is either antagonistic, or he's gotten burned by Munchkin players in the past and he's ham handing his way instead of growing some b...sense and actually looking at the characters submitted."), but I didn't quote it. I can see how it may have confused you, even though I didn't connect the two in the way you describe above.

In case it is still not clear to you: I'm agreeing with Ze's contention that GMs need to be cooperatively involved in the character creation process while disagreeing with his take on disadvantage limits.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

First of all, the optional disad "suggestion" is not RAW, there are lots of optional suggestions, that's mainly what sticks in my craw, when people go on and on about equating an option with RAW.
(Bad reaction modifier, quirk level. *grin*)

Secondly, I never said people who use that lame optional disad suggestion are bad GMs, I said using them is"an indication of a bad GM player dynamic", grammatically the adjective bad in that sentence is a modifying the word dynamic, not the word GM.
I went on to describe two of the leading causes of that bad dynamic, antagonistic GMs, which BTW is a style thing and pretty common with many gaming groups, and ham fisting due to being burned by Munchkin players, which again is a style thing and very common in many groups.

Nowhere in there did I say an antagonistic GM is a bad GM.

However, if I was in your game and came to you with a character concept for a 100 point campaign with a PC which had say ST 9, DX 9, IQ 12, Per 10, Will 10, Sense of Duty (Friends), Duty and Code of Honor (Professional) only to have you turn around and tell me to boost something because you wouldn't allow that many disads in your campaign, then I would say that you have a clear problem with your player GM dynamic and that you have a need to strut, so I'd take it as a get out of Dodge card because I know I wouldn't want to play on the rails you're setting up.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Okay, as the GM in question, let me lay out what was going on and why.

This was for a Play by Post game that mainly focuses on PVP action.

I started with the Ultra-Low points because I wanted to slowly add more complexity as the characters earned points in an Arena type setting.

All of the players received the same amount of points to create their characters and to allow one player 5 extra points would have seriously tipped the scales in a game that was intended as more Roll-Playing then Role-Playing (and was advertised as such).

This was a balance issue not a role-playing issue or antagonistic GM issue.

I think the language in the Basic Set is clear and since the 4e have always counted Quirks against the disadvantage limit.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

You're absolutely right, in a PvP balanced roll-playing situation every negative point should be counted.

A PvP arena game is, by necessity, an antagonistic GM dynamic, it's not an issue, it's a necessary part of the set-up.

The antagonistic GM dynamic is also necessary in many Dungeon Fantasy games, again as part of the set-up.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

It's a rule in a official supplement. The bleeding rules are RAW, even if they're not implemented in every game.

My mistake. You didn't call anyone a bad GM. You merely implied that anyone who used disad limits must be either:

a) antagonistic
b) ham-handed and lacking balls

And if I insist that I (or trooper6) is neither, then we must be deluded or something.

If I enforce a fixed point total is that also a sign of a bad GM-player dynamic? Or just possibly might it be that some of us (but by no means all) don't have a problem with sticking to a structure? It doesn't hurt baby jesus if I write poetry in haiku form, and it's not a sign that my english teacher beat me with a cane pole in high school when I departed from iambic pentameter. And if we all get together to do a haiku-jam, I'm not being a big meanie if I tell the guy who tries to free rhyme that we're not doing that today.

If you don't want to play in those games, fine. But it's not unreasonable for me to say "build a character within these constraints" and expect you to do so. I mean, all games operate within some constraints. What makes "it's a space opera game" different from "don't go over the disad limit"? What if your character concept for the space opera game demands that you be a stone-age hunter gatherer with several hundred points of disads? At what point is "it's part of my character concept" no longer a valid excuse to not stick to character generation restrictions?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

I must admit that the word "antagonistic" has a negative connotation for me and my immediate reaction was to be defensive.

In an Arena style PVP game I see the GM role as more purely that of referee than in any other style of play.

If the word "antagonistic" is intended in a more literary sense then the best role-playing scenarios calls for a very antagonistic GM.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

It's suggested as an option for people who don't want to use the RAW, it's not part of the RAW.

It's a GM power/control roll-playing vs role-playing issue, if you need to count a PC with DX 9, Will and Per 10 as having -40 points in disads because they have IQ 12, then you're having control issues.


How is telling a player that he has to increase his character's Will from 10 up to 12 and forbid him from playing an average Will 10 character to match his concept because of your need for a disad limit anything else other than a power control issue?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Depends on the arena, if the GM only moderates the PvP and isn't tossing out traps and monsters for the players to defeat singly or in concert, than he's just refereeing and not taking on any antagonistic role.

PvP arena games though are clearly a subset of roll-playing, more of a wargame with roleplay elements.
Sort of like Car Wars or Warhammer where you have a set amount of points or money to build your side.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Maybe it's just me coming from originally posting on dumpshock where RAW was thrown around constantly and had a very specific definition, which was "included or a result of something included in an official supplement."

... that is -40 points of disads. By definition.

It's pretty easily a wide variety of other things.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Options aren't RAW, they're just options, some of them even contradict each other directly since they're optional.

Exactly, so if you're counting it towards a limit, that has nothing to do with roleplaying or characterization, or modeling of any sort, it's strictly about the GM flexing his control by imposing a cookie cutter limit which has nothing to do with balance.

That's a bad dynamic unless you're in the mood for some sort of PvP arena rollplaying game, or other antagonistic GM style hack-n-slash or dungeon delving type of game.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

No way. other wise the only thins that is RAW is GURPS Lite. you defection does not match well anything.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

No, when designing a RAW character there are no default disad limits in place, none at all.

To have disad limits in place the GM has to specifically turn on that option and specify what the level and type of disad limit he has chosen for that specific campaign to be.

In choosing his own personal limit for a given campaign, some people may blindly default to a printed suggestion that "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to 50% of starting points", but that suggestion could've just as easily have said "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to -50 points plus -5 points in Quirks", or "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to -33% of starting points plus -5 points in Quirks", or "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to -75 points including -5 points in Quirks", or "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to -66% of starting points including -5 points in Quirks", or "a good rule of thumb is to hold disads to -150 points plus -5 points in Quirks", etc.


A "good rule of thumb" is not something that anyone can call RAW with a serious face in any way shape or form.

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

As everything not in Lite is Optional you can see how you talking nonsense?

Re: Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?
 

Dude don't be silly, if you're playing Lite, you're not playing GURPS, you're playing GURPS Lite, they aren't the same game.

If you are playing GURPS, and you don't understand what a "general rule of thumb" means, then as a general rule of thumb I suggest you find out.